C64x Unboxing videos

[DyLucke]

I can't believe this.

Let's see what we got here... A below average performance desktop pee-cee, bundled in a C64 case that costs around 600 bucks... Everything wrapped into Commodore parafernalia...
And including a "nice" C64 emulator...

MAN! My netbook performs almost the same and costs less than a half than that thing does.

I don't know what's up with that company that claims to be Commodore (USA) but that thing is NOT a Commodore at all.

Do you know what does this thing remind me?

Another piece of crap made by a company that claimed to be Commodore, a piece of crap that was outdated already when it came out to the shops. This piece of "fine" hardware i'm talking about "it's gonna be... (Wait for it)... Legen-... Uh, no... Web-it

Ladies and gentlemen take a look to this and behold how history repeats, and how some people go stepping into the same stone over and over...
Using the name and giving NOTHING in exchange.

http://www.amigahistory.co.uk/c64web.html

You just can't build a crappy PC and put on it a C64 sticker and claim it to be a C64.
The fraudulent policy of C-USA has stolen not only the Commodore name, nor the C64 case, but ALSO EVEN THE F-KEYS ON THE KEYBOARD.

Press F12 to continue... If you can.

I'm not going to buy that crap. I can emulate a C64 on my desktop PeeCee, on my Netbook, on my Mini or even on my A1200. I do own 4 C64's... I don't need another peecee into a breadbin case that probably will melt itself due the lack of airflow into a case that doesn't provide enough space for a proper refrigeration for components that produce so much heat.

What most of us are waiting for, is an implementation of the C64 on a FPGA in the way the Natami is for the Amiga...
Not some other crappy intel-nvidia-gates triunvirate product. With a nice C= sticker that means... tons of overpricing.

The former top-segment C= branded peecees marketed a couple of years ago, were a "good" idea, good performance but too expensive.
On the other hand, this product has poor performance and yet an expensive price for what is providing.

So, i can only say one thing: Boooooo

[DyLucke]

Fun fact:

Military and NASA flight computer equipment is built to cover two basical objectives, robustness, and modularity. I've seen military equipment for LRR stations, on-board IFF computers, even target designing computers that held a frakkin' 68030.

They're definitelly not top-notch CPU's, but they're robust, they don't produce too much heat, they don't have an elevate power consumption, they're reliable, they come in embedded boards for a easy module replacement... AND THEY DO  WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO.

So, comparing the Xbox with some NASA flight computer, is stupid as it would be to compare the top speed of a Ferrari with the top speed of a M2 Bradley.

[DyLucke]

If the parade hadn't been dragging on for a goddamn year and being loud and obnoxious, I might not be so inclined to rain on it.

An excellent restatement of the argument, but I'm afraid all I see is MONSTERPIECE THEATRE!

Yeah, that would be pretty great. I'd have to think that a C128 reimplementation plus a 65816 core equivalent to the SuperCPU would be easily doable on inexpensive FPGA hardware...I'd be all over that, let me tell you.

Well Monsterpiece Theatre was fun, this so called C64X is NOT.  XD

[DyLucke]

The idea of a Fun Fact is that they are supposed to be fun. But yours was not fun, it was more of a Boring Fact  :p

Hey, targeting computers are fun. Specially when you can use something to blast the target.
Mwahahahahahahah.

However the explanation was quite boring, indeed. ^^

[DyLucke]

Sorry about this because i'm not a native english speaker, but, what does that Bazza stuff mean?

[DyLucke]

I wish I could cut and paste that onto the "About Us" section of the C-USA website......

OWNED!

Spihunter 1 - Bazza 0

By the way, my netbook has the same overall specs than the basic C64X model, and it costed less than 400$
... And, ehem... It has screen, battery, and only 10" size, enough to carry it everywhere.

There's no way this product can be competitive, on the other hand there's no way it could be called C64.
Somebody should teach these guys from CUSA what was the Commodore 64 Web-it, and why it became a failure.